Canada moves to 2% GDP end of FY25/26 - PMMC

[MilEME09]

Again, I ask. What's the goal?

It's really difficult to have an air reserve that flies part time. Especially given the legal limits on airline aircrew for total flight hours. But also, simply keeping basic flight skill doesn't result in combat readiness.

There's a reason that basically the US is the only country in NATO with a substantial air national guard type of operation. Where other countries do have air reserves or conscripts it's largely for lightly skilled work or lower risk augmentation. For example, Swedish conscripts who do aircraft servicing. Or say reserve pilots who can do ferry and maintenance test flights.

I'm not sure why there has to be an air reserve developed to the same extent. They are different ops with different needs. The army needs larger numbers of lightly skilled personnel. That makes it more adaptable for part time work. Running a billion dollar flying club is less value for money.

So before all this discussion about what places are appropriate for the expanded air res, maybe discuss their purpose and goal.

I'll give a personal example. The space community has looked at inducting space science students as space operators. Useful skill that matches up with a need. Don't need an airfield for that. And we mapped out that they could be fully trained in basically 2 summers in the CAF.

Honestly, the only valuable flying I see for air reservists as an actual formation? Operating brigade level UAVs and UCAVs. Group 2. Max Group 3. I wouldn't even let them touch Group 4 or higher. I'd take away cockpit time from the reserves in the future. Unless they want to work as augmentees after a Reg F career.

You know, there are more trades in the airforce. I know pilots love to think they are the only ones but mechanics, airfield security, etc we should try and create a reserve of.

 

[Kirkhill]

Now suppose you accept that you will not get all the people on your rolls onto parade. That absent armageddon those people and the government have an interest in the economy and the life of the nation continuing undisturbed to the greatest extent possible.

Those people on your rolls are the people best placed to determine if they are available or needed. If they have time free.

In which case, using ancient lingo as is my wont, your reserves fall in as extra ranks behind the planned number of files.

Plan to employ an army three ranks deep. Maintain a pool of people 10 ranks deep.

And when you ask for people to step forwards you have a qualified and willing body of replacements.

Without shutting down the economy.

That is another lesson that Ukraine is teaching. Life goes on. Even during a war of national survival.

 

[MilEME09]

Plan to employ an army three ranks deep. Maintain a pool of people 10 ranks deep.

And when you ask for people to step forwards you have a qualified and willing body of replacements.

Especially with our come when you feel like it reserves (SRP is kinda of a joke) you need much greater depth in order to actually augment the reg force consistently or sustain multiple rotos for DOMOPs. For every position you really need 3-4 reservists because the majority will say no. They will keep saying no until the NDA is changed as well as job protection legislation (not to mention fix the pay system so people going on class C for domops get paid on time)

 

[Kirkhill]

Especially with our come when you feel like it reserves (SRP is kinda of a joke) you need much greater depth in order to actually augment the reg force consistently or sustain multiple rotos for DOMOPs. For every position you really need 3-4 reservists because the majority will say no. They will keep saying no until the NDA is changed as well as job protection legislation (not to mention fix the pay system so people going on class C for domops get paid on time)

"come when you feel like it"

Some of us see that as a feature. Not a bug.

Another aphorism I grew up with:
One volunteer is worth a thousand conscripts.

Many amateurs come because they feel like it. Not just because they are paid for it.

 

[MilEME09]

"come when you feel like it"

Some of us see that as a feature. Not a bug.

Another aphorism I grew up with:
One volunteer is worth a thousand conscripts.

Many amateurs come because they feel like it. Not just because they are paid for it.

And thats a fair point of view, but what I am saying is if we want to continue to do that, especially with the current op tempo, we need more depth.

 

[Kirkhill]

And thats a fair point of view, but what I am saying is if we want to continue to do that, especially with the current op tempo, we need more depth.

Total agreement.

 

[Kirkhill]

One area that I hope the tiger team will focus on is that of converting civilians with skills into soldiers so that the forces can take advantage of those skills.

One problem we all face is we don't know what we don't know until we run into somebody that does know what we don't know.

 

[MilEME09]

One area that I hope the tiger team will focus on is that of converting civilians with skills into soldiers so that the forces can take advantage of those skills.

One problem we all face is we don't know what we don't know until we run into somebody that does know what we don't know.

I think thats the point of the proposed new ready reserve. Skilled people trained in areas the military needs

 

[ytz]

You know, there are more trades in the airforce. I know pilots love to think they are the only ones but mechanics, airfield security, etc we should try and create a reserve of.

Not a pilot. And nowhere did I say that. I specifically gave an example of my community (Space) looking at leveraging local talent as reservists.

But there's no denying that air forces are aviation centric. And if there's no aviation activity at all, what's there for those other trades to support?

 

[Kirkhill]

National Service and Canadian Security: Lessons from Scandinavia and Elsewhere - Eastern European and Transatlantic Network

The return of war to Europe with Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has caused many North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) members to re-evaluate and reflect upon their own practices of state sovereignty, defence, and foreign policy. Canada is no different in this regard; Russia’s...

carleton.ca

 

[FJAG]

Those people on your rolls are the people best placed to determine if they are available or needed. If they have time free.

A military can't function that way.

In which case, using ancient lingo as is my wont, your reserves fall in as extra ranks behind the planned number of files.

Plan to employ an army three ranks deep. Maintain a pool of people 10 ranks deep.

And when you ask for people to step forwards you have a qualified and willing body of replacements.

You don't need that many ranks. You just need as many as you can afford to equip for immediate and foreseeable needs. When and if the time comes to build an even more massive army, you will have the time to recruit and build that force while it's equipment is being produced. Four ranks - RegF, PRes, SuppRes and Rangers is sufficient.

Without shutting down the economy.

When we had a country of 11 million we put 1 million in uniform and the economy kept rolling and, in fact, boomed. We now have a country of 40 million and it is entirely inconceivable that we could equip and train one million, much less four. We don't need one million.

That is another lesson that Ukraine is teaching. Life goes on. Even during a war of national survival.

The number of folks diverted to the military won't affect that.

Especially with our come when you feel like it reserves (SRP is kinda of a joke) you need much greater depth in order to actually augment the reg force consistently or sustain multiple rotos for DOMOPs.

You see, here's where I have the problem with current usage of the reserves and it comes from the word "consistently." Under our legal definition of regular force and reserve force, there should be no consistent requirement to augment the regular force . There could be short term requirements to backfill regulars on maternity leave and the occasional natural disaster DOMOP surge, but never consistently for deployed "peacetime" operations or to bulk out the cubicles in Ottawa. Those should all be regular force tasks, planned for and recruited and filled with full-timers. All ou are doing is rotating part-timers through continuing, full-time employment positions which flies in the face of the NDA.

For every position you really need 3-4 reservists because the majority will say no. They will keep saying no until the NDA is changed

Reservists can only say "no" when you ask them to volunteer. The NDA, as it stands, means that a reservist cannot say "no" when the right legal authority tells them that they must go. Since we are using reservists improperly on "continuing, full-time service", no one rightfully has the guts to say "you must go."

There are structural and conceptual issues here that the RegF leadership either doesn't understand or understands full well and plays wink, wink, nudge, nudge with. During the middle stages of the Afghan mission we - at CRes & C Council - were told that the CDS expected that every reservist should volunteer to be deployed for six months or so every four to six years or so. That completely misconstrues the concept of an "other than continuous, full-time service" PRes. If, for example, we wanted to do an Obama-like surge for a year by doubling our force in an operational theatre, then I would fully agree to placing elements of the PRes on active service for that extraordinary year. That would be a proper use of the PRes under the NDA. To fill 20% of a long-standing ongoing combat mission is stretching things. To fill 20% of a peacetime deployment is not proper. And neither is decades of Class B use in Ottawa and other headquarters.

as well as job protection legislation (not to mention fix the pay system so people going on class C for domops get paid on time)

Here I fully agree. The job protection legislation sucks . . . plain and simple.

 

[ytz]

I'm getting really worried about the Saab/Bombardier tie up rumours. Saab got smart. Ditched IMP. Got Bombardier onboard. And now the Industry Minister (Joly) is openly advocating to buy Gripens and Globaleyes. This would be absolutely terrible for the RCAF. Not to mention the bilateral relationships with the US.

 

[dapaterson]

I'm getting really worried about the Saab/Bombardier tie up rumours. Saab got smart. Ditched IMP. Got Bombardier onboard. And now the Industry Minister (Joly) is openly advocating to buy Gripens and Globaleyes. This would be absolutely terrible for the RCAF. Not to mention the bilateral relationships with the US.

The bilateral problems with the US have everything to do with the US President.

 

[Kirkhill]

A military can't function that way.

You don't need that many ranks. You just need as many as you can afford to equip for immediate and foreseeable needs. When and if the time comes to build an even more massive army, you will have the time to recruit and build that force while it's equipment is being produced. Four ranks - RegF, PRes, SuppRes and Rangers is sufficient.

When we had a country of 11 million we put 1 million in uniform and the economy kept rolling and, in fact, boomed. We now have a country of 40 million and it is entirely inconceivable that we could equip and train one million, much less four. We don't need one million.

The number of folks diverted to the military won't affect that.

You see, here's where I have the problem with current usage of the reserves and it comes from the word "consistently." Under our legal definition of regular force and reserve force, there should be no consistent requirement to augment the regular force . There could be short term requirements to backfill regulars on maternity leave and the occasional natural disaster DOMOP surge, but never consistently for deployed "peacetime" operations or to bulk out the cubicles in Ottawa. Those should all be regular force tasks, planned for and recruited and filled with full-timers. All ou are doing is rotating part-timers through continuing, full-time employment positions which flies in the face of the NDA.

Reservists can only say "no" when you ask them to volunteer. The NDA, as it stands, means that a reservist cannot say "no" when the right legal authority tells them that they must go. Since we are using reservists improperly on "continuing, full-time service", no one rightfully has the guts to say "you must go."

There are structural and conceptual issues here that the RegF leadership either doesn't understand or understands full well and plays wink, wink, nudge, nudge with. During the middle stages of the Afghan mission we - at CRes & C Council - were told that the CDS expected that every reservist should volunteer to be deployed for six months or so every four to six years or so. That completely misconstrues the concept of an "other than continuous, full-time service" PRes. If, for example, we wanted to do an Obama-like surge for a year by doubling our force in an operational theatre, then I would fully agree to placing elements of the PRes on active service for that extraordinary year. That would be a proper use of the PRes under the NDA. To fill 20% of a long-standing ongoing combat mission is stretching things. To fill 20% of a peacetime deployment is not proper. And neither is decades of Class B use in Ottawa and other headquarters.

Here I fully agree. The job protection legislation sucks . . . plain and simple.

You continue to confuse a country dragged into a total war with a country managing kabinett wars cost effectively.

I want more tank crews than tanks
I want more tanks in storage than operational.

 

[Kirkhill]

I think thats the point of the proposed new ready reserve. Skilled people trained in areas the military needs

Another hope of mine is that when these civilians become soldiers they will appreciate the military situation differently and create new estimates.

 

[FJAG]

You continue to confuse a country dragged into a total war with a country managing kabinett wars cost effectively.

Maybe I would if I knew what that was.

I want more tank crews than tanks
I want more tanks in storage than operational.

Me too. I call that the ARes.

 

[Kirkhill]

Maybe I would if I knew what that was.

Big wars and little wars

Me too. I call that the ARes.

Me too
I just differentiate between those the Regs can call on tonight and those that are going to take a month to come on line.

30,000 Regs
60,000 Available tonight
180,000 Available in a month

Allow for hyperbole in your calculations.

 

[ytz]

The bilateral problems with the US have everything to do with the US President.

Yes. But what I mean is they could get worse. I can easily see a scenario where Trump pushes for an end to NORAD or our Five Eyes access. The latter was already advocated for in the Trump Administration a few months ago.

White House official pushes to axe Canada from Five Eyes intelligence group

A top White House official has proposed expelling Canada from the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing network to ramp up pressure. Read more

financialpost.com

 

[Maxman1]

Is there any reason why the government couldn't make an index of all past members by their SINs and use that as the foundation of their 300,000 Supplementary Reserve?

Sounds like a modern version of the Veterans Guard of Canada.

Veterans Guard of Canada - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[MilEME09]

Another hope of mine is that when these civilians become soldiers they will appreciate the military situation differently and create new estimates.

What ive heard is they will complete a reserve BMQ, thats it, then come back annually for about a week or two for IBTS. Then go back to their lives.